Axis Moscow - Beijing 2.0

The visit of the CPC head to Moscow is perceived worldwide as symbolic. It is no coincidence that the leaders of China and Russia preceded this meeting with program articles. Putin described how he sees the relationship with China. Xi Jinping gave his assessment. In general, the positions of the two world leaders coincide: China and Russia are close strategic partners rejecting the hegemony of the modern West and consistently advocate a multipolar world. Both Xi Jinping and Putin give the whole picture of the world in their texts. It is already multipolar, with China, Russia and the collective West as the most established poles. At the same time, both leaders emphasize that neither China nor Russia seek to impose their own model on other peoples, recognizing the right of each civilization to develop according to its own logic, that is, to become a full-fledged pole with a sovereign system of values. The West adheres to the exact opposite attitude, and does not give up its hopes to save the unipolar model, which is completely discredited itself - with only one (liberal) ideology, with the system of gender politics, unlimited migration, total mixing of societies and posthumanism. Russia and China unanimously reject Western hegemony and declare their unwavering will to build a democratic, truly free multipolar world.

The very meeting between Xi Jinping and Putin in Moscow will be a seal of sorts, sealing a document on the era of multipolarity. 

Both leaders emphasized the positive significance of the plan proposed by Beijing to resolve the Ukrainian conflict. Xi Jinping once again mentioned the need for peace, and Putin recognized the Chinese proposals as sensible and rational. Another thing is that the West and the Kiev Nazi regime categorically rejected Xi Jinping's plan without even beginning to discuss or consider it. Therefore, it is unlikely to be of much significance. But its very existence and the agreement in principle by the two great powers is already big deal. 

Both the conflict in Ukraine and the escalation around Taiwan are generally interpreted by the leaders of Russia and China in the same way, laying the blame on the aggressive and provocative policy of the West.

Now a few words should be said about how the visit is perceived in Moscow. The prevailing viewpoint is generally consistent with the programmatic assertions of our leaders. It is a declaration of a multipolar world, based on the closest geopolitical and civilizational alliance between China and Russia, ready to repel the pressure of the hegemonic West and offering to join multipolar club to the other civilizations - Islamic, Indian, African, Latin American, and in the future the West itself – if Western elites woud eventually renounce globalism and unipolarity. 

The agreement on a plan for a peaceful resolution of the conflict in Ukraine also underscores the closeness of our positions, although with the West and the Zelensky regime completely ignoring the Chinese project, it is unlikely to have any real dimension in the near future. 

For Moscow, Chairman Xi's visit at such a difficult moment is very important. It shows that the great power, China, is not at all in solidarity with attempts to isolate Russia on the international stage, as the West seeks to do, and that relations between countries and peoples are at a historical peak. 

This is roughly how the responsible Russian expert community sees Xi Jinping's visit. This is a symbolic gesture of the established multipolarity represented by two world leaders who fully agree with each other on the main parameters of the future.

However, other voices are also heard in Russia. We can sometimes hear opinion that China is playing its own game, is not going to actually help Russia in its head-on confrontation with the West, and is ready to enter into separate negotiations with Washington. This is all the more possible because the Chinese economy is too dependent on Western markets, and China itself is not yet ready for a frontal conflict with the West and will try to postpone it as much as possible or avoid it altogether. But in the meantime, Russia may have fallen on hard times. The main topic of such fears is China's lack of readiness to provide military assistance to Russia. 

From my point of view, these fears can be explained by the fact that many in Russia do not understand the peculiarity of Chinese policy, which consists of a deliberate calculation of many different options and is based primarily on the protection national interests of China as a Dtate. Russian observers, who fear betrayal by China, do not understand the Chinese strategy itself, the Chinese dream, which is aimed at the prosperity of the socialist system, Confucian Empire and the construction of a harmonious system of international relations. Russia today finds itself in a more direct confrontation with the West. China is well aware that Russia takes the blow back from itself, that is, our war is its war, or rather the absence of war, the postponement of it. The Chinese dream is only possible with the full geopolitical and civilizational sovereignty of China, and thus is incompatible with the Western hegemony and liberal dictatorship. Therefore, China will be on Russia's side not just for opportunistic reasons, from which it could retreat at any time if the situation turns the other way, but because of its strategic orientation towards full independence. At the same time one should not expect China to take too drastic steps in supporting Russia military. That would be completely un-Chinese. But there are many other ways to help the friend in difficult situation.

The second type of criticism of Russia-China relations comes from the fact that China is an economic and demographic giant. A rapprochement with Russia would automatically turn Russia into a junior and dependent partner whose lands and resources might seem easy prey for the rapidly developing China. This fear is logical, but in practice it boils down to the fact that together China would be better off preferring the West. And this is where the logic ends. We are at war with the West, but we are friends with China. And the West in its relations with Russia insists on its complete subordination to the Western liberal elites and their Russian representatives. China, on the other hand, does not impose anything and its strategy is completely transparent and rational.

The answer to this fear would be to strengthen one's own Russian identity, to make a sharp breakthrough in the economy and industry, and to pursue a smart demographic policy. Russia is in danger of becoming a vassal of China only if it completely weakens and loses its sovereignty. But Putin, on the contrary, is trying to strengthen its sovereignty. Therefore, all proportions of equality and mutual benefit in the Russian-Chinese relations will be respected. And the rest depends only on Russia - China behaves consistently, predictably, and openly. It has no imperialistic plans with regard to Russia (and with regard to other nations).

In any case, Xi Jinping's visit to Moscow opens a new page in international relations. This is a crucial point in the development of dialogue and cooperation not only between two great States, but also between two Civilizations. It is no coincidence that both Xi Jinping and Putin mentioned the need to develop humanitariancooperation, joint educational, cultural and scientific projects. In order to get to know each other better, it is important for the Chinese and Russians not only to trade but also to be friends, just as peoples and cultures are friends, interested in each other and striving to understand each other. Xi Jinping and Putin's personal friendship is a model, an archetype. But it is important that the Moscow-Beijing axis 2.0 would not be limited to the communication of State leaders, but would also enthrall the intellectual elite, creators, artists, scientists and ordinary people. In many ways, the West has closed itself off to Russia. On the other hand, China, which is emerging from a pandemic, is opening its doors to the Russians.